Atkins

MEMORANDUM **

Roger Atkins, John Peel, and Cheri Peel (collectively, “Employees”) appeal the district court’s decision granting summary judgment against them, finding that their state court action was preempted and time-barred pursuant to § 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act (“LMRA”), 29 U.S.C. § 185 . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and affirm.

We review de novo a grant of summary judgment. Buono v. Norton, 371 F.3d 543, 545 (9th Cir.2004). In doing so, this Court “must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, there are any genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court correctly applied the relevant substantive law.” Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1131 (9th Cir.2000). The district court’s decision regarding preemption is also reviewed de novo. Cramer v. Consol. Freightways, Inc., 255 F.3d 683 , 689 (9th Cir.2001) (en banc).

Section 301 of the LMRA provides exclusive federal jurisdiction over “suits for violation of contracts between an employer and a labor organization.” 29 U.S.C. § 185 (a). A state law claim is preempted by § 301 of the LMRA when it “necessarily requires the court to…